All Issue

2018 Vol.55, Issue 2 Preview Page

Technical Report

Case Study for Effective Stimulated Reservoir Volume Identification in Unconventional Reservoirs

비전통 저류층에서의 유효 수압파쇄대 규명을 위한 사례분석연구

Jee-hoon Byun1
,
Woo-seong Jin1*
,
Jun-seog Yi1
변 지훈1
,
진 우성1*
,
이 준석1
1Technology Development Dept., Korea National Oil Corporation
1한국석유공사
* Corresponding Author
30 April 2018. pp. 127-146
PDF XML Citation
Abstract

Well spacing determines how the project is undertaken as well as estimated ultimate recovery (EUR) and CAPEX. It is vital to identify effective stimulated reservoir volume (SRV) for selection of optimal well spacing, which requires quantification of not only proppant filling and distribution aspects but also frac conductivity reduction and damage mechanisms. However, it is highly uncertain to identify effective SRV because both of injected proppant and frac conductivity are not able to be measured directly. Accordingly, a case study on Eagle Ford Shale was conducted using microseismic, frac model and rate-transient analysis (RTA) and Anadarko’s field development planning strategy was examined. Consequently, it can be understood that distance-based SRV segmentation such as HSRV, CSRV and FSRV using integrated analysis and utilization of wells per section (WPS)-based net present value (NPV) curve are reasonable alternatives for field development planning as well as effective SRV identification and selection of optimal well spacing.

Keywords
Effective stimulated reservoir volume (SRV)
Well spacing
Integrated analysis
Proppant,
Frac conductivity

치밀 및 셰일 유 · 가스전 개발에 있어 유정간격은 궁극가채량 및 CAPEX를 결정짓고 사업의 추진방향을 좌우한다. 최적의 유정간격 선정을 위해서는 유효 수압파쇄대 규명이 필수적으로, 균열지지체의 충진 및 분포양상은 물론 균열전도도의 감소 및 손실 메커니즘에 대한 정량화가 요구된다. 그러나 이들에 대한 직접적인 측정이 불가함에 따라 유효 수압파쇄대 규명의 불확실성은 높다. 이에 미세탄성파, 균열모델 및 생산분석을 이용한 이글포드 셰일 사례연구를 수행함은 물론 아나다코사의 필드개발계획 수립전략을 살펴보았고 그 결과, 통합분석에 따라 유정자극범위를 HSRV, CSRV 및 FSRV와 같이 거리기반으로 구획화하는 방식 및 WPS기준의 순현재가치 곡선 이용이 유효 수압파쇄대 규명 및 최적의 유정간격 선정은 물론 필드개발계획 수립을 위한 합리적인 대안임을 이해할 수 있다.

키워드
유효 수압파쇄대
유정간격
통합분석
균열지지체
균열전도도
References
1
Anadarko Petroleum Corporation, 2015. Preserving Value & Positioning for the Future. 2015 Anadarko Investor Conference Call, The Woodlands, Texas, USA, 26p.
2
Barree, R.D., Fisher, M.K. and Woodroof, R.A., 2002. A practical guide to hydraulic fracture diagnostic technologies. Proc. of SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio, Texas, USA, p.2-9.
10.2118/77442-MS
3
Bazan, L.W., Larkin, S.D., Lattibeaudiere, M.G., and Palisch, T.T., 2010. Improving production in the eagle ford shale with fracture modeling, increased conductivity and optimized stage and cluster spacing along the horizontal wellbore. Proc. of SPE Tight Gas Completions Conference, San Antonio, Texas, USA, p.10-15.
10.2118/138425-MS20414817
4
Bazan, L.W., Lattibeaudiere, M.G., and Palish, T.T., 2012. Hydraulic fracture design and well production results in the eagle ford shale: one operator’s perspective. Proc. of Americas Unconventional Resources Conference, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA, 10p.
10.2118/155779-MS
5
Byun, J.H., 2016. Technical considerations for optimizing development strategy in a tight gas condensate reservoir. J. Korean Soc. Miner. Energy Resour. Eng., 53(6), 615-626.
6
Cao, R., Li, R., Girardi, A., Chowdhury, N., and Chen, C., 2017. Well interference and optimum well spacing for wolfcamp development at permian basin. Proc. of Unconventional Resources Technology Conference, Austin, Texas, USA, p.2-3.
10.15530/urtec-2017-2691962
7
Cipolla, C.L., Warpinski, N.R., Mayerhofer, M.J., Lolon, E.P., and Vincent, M.C., 2010. The relationship between fracture complexity, reservoir properties, and fracture-treatment design. SPE Production & Operations, 25(4), 438-452.
10.2118/115769-PA
8
Cipolla, C.L. and Wright, C.A., 2000. State-of-the-art in hydraulic fracture diagnostics. Proc. of SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition, Brisbane, Australia, 2p.
10.2118/64434-MS
9
Clarkson, C.R., 2011b. Integration of rate-transient and microseismic analysis for unconventional gas reservoirs: where reservoir engineering meets geophysics. CSEG RECORDER, 36(10), 53-59.
10
Clarkson, C.R., Jensen, J.L., and Blasingame, T.A., 2011a. Reservoir engineering for unconventional gas reservoirs: what do we have to consider?. Proc. of SPE North American Unconventional Gas Conference and Exhibition, The Woodlands, Texas, USA, p.27-31.
10.2118/145080-MS
11
Courtier, J., Chandler, K., Gray, D., Martin, S., Thomas, R., Wicker, J., and Ciezobka, J., 2017. Best practices in designing and executing a comprehensive hydraulic fracturing test site in the permian basin. Proc. of Unconventional Resources Technology Conference, Austin, Texas, USA, 13p.
10.15530/urtec-2017-2697483
12
Cramer, D.D. and Nguyen, D.H., 2013. Diagnostic fracture injection testing tactics in unconventional reservoirs. Proc. of SPE Hydraulic Fracturing Technology Conference, The Woodlands, Texas, USA, p.34-35.
13
Darugar, Q., Heinisch, D., Lundy, B.J., Witte, P., Wu, W., and Zhou, S., 2016. Estimating ultimate recovery and economic analysis of shale oil wells in eagle ford and bakken. Proc. of Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Exhibition & Conference, Abu Dhabi, UAE, 15p.
14
Economides, M.J., Hill, A.D, and Economides, C.E., 1994. Petroleum Production System (1st Ed.), PTR Prentice Hall, New Jersey, USA, p.452-454.
15
Edwards, K.L., Weissert, S., Jackson, J., and Marcotte, D., 2011. Marcellus shale hydraulic fracturing and optimal well spacing to maximize recovery and control costs. Proc. of SPE Hydraulic Fracturing Technology Conference and Exhibition, The Woodlands, Texas, USA, p.6-7.
10.2118/140463-MS
16
Friedrich, M. and Milliken, M., 2013. Determining the contributing reservoir volume from hydraulically fractured horizontal wells in the wolfcamp formation in the midland basin. Proc. of Unconventional Resources Technology Conference in Denver, Colorado, USA, p.4-5.
10.1190/urtec2013-149
17
Kam, P., Nadeem, M., Omatsone, E.N., Novlesky, A., and Kumar, A., 2014. Integrated geoscience and reservoir simulation approach to understanding fluid flow in multi-well pad shale gas reservoirs. Proc. of Unconventional Resources Conference, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 10p.
10.2118/171611-MS
18
Lee, H.S., Kang, P.S., and Lim, J.S., 2017. Study for improvement of multi-stage hydraulic fracturing design for eagle ford shale reservoir using rate transient analysis. J. Korean Soc. Miner. Energy Resour. Eng., 54(6), 664-678.
19
Liang, B., Du, M., Goloway, C., Hammond, R., Yanez, P.P., and Tran, T., 2017. Subsurface well spacing optimization in the permian basin. Proc. of Unconventional Resources Technology Conference, Austin, Texas, USA, 8p.
10.15530/urtec-2017-2671346
20
Manhattan Institute, 2015. Shale 2.0, Technology and the Coming Big-Data Revolution in America’s Shale Oil Fields. Energy Policy and the Environment Report 16, New York, USA, p.3-4.
21
Maxwell, S.C., 2011. What does microseismic tell us about hydraulic fracture deformation. CSEG RECORDER, 36(8), 40p.
22
McDaniel, B.W., 1986. Conductivity testing of proppants at high temperature and stress. Proc. of 56th SPE California Regional Meeting, Oakland, California, USA, 9p.
10.2118/15067-MS
23
Meek, R., Woller, K., George, M., Hull, R., Bello, H., and Wagner, J., 2017. Time-lapse imaging of a hydraulic stimulation using 4D vertical seismic profiles and fiber optics in the midland basin. Proc. of Unconventional Resources Technology Conference, San Antonio, Texas, USA, 7p.
10.15530/urtec-2017-2695394
24
Moinfar, A., Erdle, J.C., and Patel, K., 2016. Comparison of numerical vs analytical models for EUR calculation and optimization in unconventional reservoirs. Proc. of SPE Low Perm Symposium, Denver, Colorado, USA, 8p.
10.2118/180209-MS
25
Palisch, T., Al-Tailji, W., Bartel, L., Cannan, C., Zhang, J., Czapski, M., and Lynch, K., 2017. Far-field proppant detection using electromagnetic methods – latest field results. Proc. of SPE Hydraulic Fracturing Technology Conference and Exhibition, The Woodlands, Texas, U.S.A., p.2-13.
10.2118/184880-MS
26
Palisch, T., Duenckel, R., Bazan, L., Heidt, H.J., Turk, G., 2007. Determining Realistic Fracture Conductivity and Understanding its Impact on Well Performance – Theory and Field Examples. Proc. of SPE Hydraulic Fracturing Technology Conference, College Station, Texas, U.S.A., p.2-9.
10.2118/106301-MS
27
Raterman, K.T., Farrell, H.E., Mora, O.S., Janssen, A.L., Gomez, G.A., Busetti, S., McEwen, J., Davidson, M., Friehauf, K., Rutherford, J., Reid, R., Jin, G., Roy, B., and Warren, M., 2017. Sampling a stimulated rock volume: an eagle ford example. Proc. of Unconventional Resources Technology Conference, Austin, Texas, USA, 14p.
10.15530/urtec-2017-2670034
28
Suliman, B., Meek, R., Hull, R., Bello, H., Portis, D., and Richmond, P., 2013. Variable stimulated reservoir volume (SRV) simulation: eagle ford shale case study. Proc. of Unconventional Resources Conference, The Woodlands, Texas, USA, 6p.
10.1190/urtec2013-057
29
US DOE/NETL, 2005. Advanced Fracturing Technology for Tight Gas: An East Texas Field Demonstration. DOE Final Report DE-FC26-01NT41326, Morgantown, West Verginia, USA, 5.1-5.29.
30
Warpinski, N.R., Mayerhofer, M.J., Vincent, M.C., Cipolla, C.L., and Lolon, E.P., 2009. Stimulating unconventional reservoirs: maximizing network growth while optimizing fracture conductivity. J. Cdn Pet Tech, 48(10), 39-51.
10.2118/114173-PA
31
Yu, W., and Sepehrnoori, K., 2014. Optimization of well spacing for bakken tight oil reservoirs. Proc. of Unconventional Resources Technology Conference, Denver, Colorado, USA, p.6-7.
10.15530/urtec-2014-1922108
Information
  • Publisher :The Korean Society of Mineral and Energy Resources Engineers
  • Publisher(Ko) :한국자원공학회
  • Journal Title :Journal of the Korean Society of Mineral and Energy Resources Engineers
  • Journal Title(Ko) :한국자원공학회지
  • Volume : 55
  • No :2
  • Pages :127-146
  • Received Date : 2018-01-18
  • Revised Date : 2018-04-12
  • Accepted Date : 2018-04-20
  • DOI :https://doi.org/10.32390/ksmer.2018.55.2.127
Journal Informaiton Journal of the Korean Society of Mineral and Energy Resources Engineers Journal of the Korean Society of Mineral and Energy Resources Engineers
Online Submission
  • NRF
  • KOFST
  • crossref crossmark
  • crossref cited-by
  • KCI 문헌 유사도 검사
  • orcid
  • open access
  • ccl
Journal Informaiton Journal Informaiton - close